The Metatron
Registered Senior Member
Check this out also since were on the subject of public flying vehicles.
http://www.solotrek.com
http://www.solotrek.com
The future of human transport
- Thread starter Monolith
- Start date
- Status
kmguru
Staff member
A longtime GM executive once told me, everybody shuned Mazda for their bold initiative for political, marketing, kill the competitor or whatever reason. So not much research in material technology was done. Then the rumor was that GM will build big truck rotary engines.
What we need is a carbon nanotube based engines and structural parts....
What we need is a carbon nanotube based engines and structural parts....
Maybe I missed it, but why did nobody talk about teleportation?
http://www.research.ibm.com/quantuminfo/teleportation/
http://www.sciam.com/explorations/122297teleport/index.html
http://www.aip.org/enews/physnews/1997/split/pnu350-1.htm
Instead of improving an existing design, namely the automobile, why not focus on an entirely different technology?
http://www.research.ibm.com/quantuminfo/teleportation/
http://www.sciam.com/explorations/122297teleport/index.html
http://www.aip.org/enews/physnews/1997/split/pnu350-1.htm
Instead of improving an existing design, namely the automobile, why not focus on an entirely different technology?
I think our best hope for more efficient travel in the near future comes in two forms: mass transit and improved hybrid cars. The mass transit idea is pretty obvious, so I'll focus on the second.
Currently we have electric cars (rare and inefficient), we have gas/electric hybrid cars (like the Toyota Prius, rare and efficient) and gas cars (common and inefficient to somewhat efficient). As happy as I am about hybrid cars, considering they get better gas milage than similar gas cars and don't require any kind of battery charging or fuel cell, I think they still use gas even at low, around-town speeds (correct me if I'm wrong). They use an electric motor charged by braking to augment the gas engine but I think it still starts with gas and uses gas mainly. If we could get a hybrid developed that could run around town (35 or 40 mph and lower) on electricity alone, I think that would be great. Gas could be used only for when people need to be on the highway, which is when gas engines are most efficient anyway.
Currently we have electric cars (rare and inefficient), we have gas/electric hybrid cars (like the Toyota Prius, rare and efficient) and gas cars (common and inefficient to somewhat efficient). As happy as I am about hybrid cars, considering they get better gas milage than similar gas cars and don't require any kind of battery charging or fuel cell, I think they still use gas even at low, around-town speeds (correct me if I'm wrong). They use an electric motor charged by braking to augment the gas engine but I think it still starts with gas and uses gas mainly. If we could get a hybrid developed that could run around town (35 or 40 mph and lower) on electricity alone, I think that would be great. Gas could be used only for when people need to be on the highway, which is when gas engines are most efficient anyway.
kmguru
Staff member
Depending on oil/gas is not a good solution since we import a lot from overseas. We have to rethink the whole picture. Why do you need transportation to begin with?
Majority of private use is to go to work and some leisure, grocery shopping etc. Then transportation of goods. If we can just reduce going to work by 50%, we can save millions of barrels of oil. Most of the jobs today are services, so one can telecommute from home or a bike distance to a high speed portal. Go to any office in a major downtown city like Chicago, L.A., Dallas etc. you could easily set up telecommuting for 80% of them. If you are thinking the restaurant and other services to these workers, they have to move to suburbs and turn into milkman type business (distribute food and services to home-workers).
Let us do this first - that will save money, road rage, pollution and bring back family life to the country. No more office romances to break up marriages etc. Then we should talk about leisure transporation....
Majority of private use is to go to work and some leisure, grocery shopping etc. Then transportation of goods. If we can just reduce going to work by 50%, we can save millions of barrels of oil. Most of the jobs today are services, so one can telecommute from home or a bike distance to a high speed portal. Go to any office in a major downtown city like Chicago, L.A., Dallas etc. you could easily set up telecommuting for 80% of them. If you are thinking the restaurant and other services to these workers, they have to move to suburbs and turn into milkman type business (distribute food and services to home-workers).
Let us do this first - that will save money, road rage, pollution and bring back family life to the country. No more office romances to break up marriages etc. Then we should talk about leisure transporation....
I agree that depending on oil/gas is not a good solution, but I was talking about anything that will realistically happen soon.
I also agree that telecommuting might work for some people, but we would need to install expansive high-speed networks to make it work for many people. I don't think there is any way you could really expect restaurants to get by on delivery to homes. Fast food, maybe, but not regular restaurants. Restaurants that can't get by on delivery would have to be situated within a short walk from major transit stops or people won't go.
Also, if so many people are going to be riding mass transit it has to be fast, and stops have to be often. People don't like to have to wait for transportation, that's why people like cars. If you have a car you can just get in and go. Some of the reasons I don't use mass transit are:
1. I have to wait. My schedule is tight between working and school. I can't wait 15-30 minutes for the bus to show up. Also, the bus does not go from A to B, it goes in huge loops, and I might have to transfer one or more times to get where I want to go.
2. Mass transit is more expensive than driving my car. Currently, it would cost me $1 to ride the bus from my city to the nearby city I work in. It costs me $0.75 in my car and my car is more convenient.
I also agree that telecommuting might work for some people, but we would need to install expansive high-speed networks to make it work for many people. I don't think there is any way you could really expect restaurants to get by on delivery to homes. Fast food, maybe, but not regular restaurants. Restaurants that can't get by on delivery would have to be situated within a short walk from major transit stops or people won't go.
Also, if so many people are going to be riding mass transit it has to be fast, and stops have to be often. People don't like to have to wait for transportation, that's why people like cars. If you have a car you can just get in and go. Some of the reasons I don't use mass transit are:
1. I have to wait. My schedule is tight between working and school. I can't wait 15-30 minutes for the bus to show up. Also, the bus does not go from A to B, it goes in huge loops, and I might have to transfer one or more times to get where I want to go.
2. Mass transit is more expensive than driving my car. Currently, it would cost me $1 to ride the bus from my city to the nearby city I work in. It costs me $0.75 in my car and my car is more convenient.
I think that cars with hydrogen engines is a good idea. Hydrogen is a cheap pletiful fuel source and the only waste product of it is water that is actually cleaner that what you get from your sink. The only real problem with hydrogen is it has this annoying tendency to explode a bit. If that can be solved it is the perfect fuel.
Last edited:
kmguru
Staff member
The reason Petrol is so expensive elsewhere (not in US) is that the respective governments put too much tax on it. It is similar to bottled water costing $1.00 to $2.00 per gallon (greed).
Also the reason people use personal car and every family has multiple car in US is that it is an integral part of social economics. That is why we have a $9 trillion GDP. The US is too large and factories or offices are somehow located in the opposite side of where one lives. I can guarantee that China will have a similar problem in that the Chinese society will end up as many cars, motor-cycles as US. The whole idea is flexibility (comes from manufacturing...) that enhances productivity of a society.
Except New York, without a flexible transportation system, US economy will crawl to a stop. However. there is a light at the end of the tunnel. More and more people use computers at work for over 95% of the work they do. As a large number of people start telecommuting, the need for car to go to work will subside. So we may save a lot of money, energy by changing the way we work without taking a hit on economy. The reason telecommuting has not caught on in US is that of stupid perceptions. People think, if they dont see you working in a office, you may not be working. In one occassion, the client asked me to work from my home because the travel and hotel cost was too much (San Francisco).
I can guarantee you, if our gas prices suddenly more than double, world recession will ensue. Just look at airline fiasco. Except a few places, I do not have a mechanism to travel alternate ways to Dallas, Atlanta or Houston. And, even to Dallas, I can reach their faster by my personal car than by air, bus, train....
Also the reason people use personal car and every family has multiple car in US is that it is an integral part of social economics. That is why we have a $9 trillion GDP. The US is too large and factories or offices are somehow located in the opposite side of where one lives. I can guarantee that China will have a similar problem in that the Chinese society will end up as many cars, motor-cycles as US. The whole idea is flexibility (comes from manufacturing...) that enhances productivity of a society.
Except New York, without a flexible transportation system, US economy will crawl to a stop. However. there is a light at the end of the tunnel. More and more people use computers at work for over 95% of the work they do. As a large number of people start telecommuting, the need for car to go to work will subside. So we may save a lot of money, energy by changing the way we work without taking a hit on economy. The reason telecommuting has not caught on in US is that of stupid perceptions. People think, if they dont see you working in a office, you may not be working. In one occassion, the client asked me to work from my home because the travel and hotel cost was too much (San Francisco).
I can guarantee you, if our gas prices suddenly more than double, world recession will ensue. Just look at airline fiasco. Except a few places, I do not have a mechanism to travel alternate ways to Dallas, Atlanta or Houston. And, even to Dallas, I can reach their faster by my personal car than by air, bus, train....
The lack of flying cars is a little disappointing to me, too. The real shame is, they have been invented! The "Aerocar" first flew sometime in the late 50's or early 60's, but I guess it was deemed either unsafe or unprofitable.
I think the next big step in transport will be in the aviation field. Try going to JPL (the Jet Propulsion Laboratory) and look at their X-43 AKA "Hyper-X" aircraft. This will, I think, have to be combined with larger "lifting body" designs to accommodate the increase in numbers of air travelers.
Found a link to flying cars :
http://www.howstuffworks.com/flying-car.html
Check out the "History of Flying Cars" page, it's hysterical!!
And the Hyper-X can be found at:
http://spacelink.nasa.gov/NASA.Projects/Aerospace.Technology/Pioneer.Technology.Innovation/Hyper-X/
I think the next big step in transport will be in the aviation field. Try going to JPL (the Jet Propulsion Laboratory) and look at their X-43 AKA "Hyper-X" aircraft. This will, I think, have to be combined with larger "lifting body" designs to accommodate the increase in numbers of air travelers.
Found a link to flying cars :
http://www.howstuffworks.com/flying-car.html
Check out the "History of Flying Cars" page, it's hysterical!!
And the Hyper-X can be found at:
http://spacelink.nasa.gov/NASA.Projects/Aerospace.Technology/Pioneer.Technology.Innovation/Hyper-X/
Electric Car
Check out this new electric car:
http://www.acpropulsion.com
It actually beats a Porsche in race test:
http://www.acpropulsion.com/tzero_pages/Porsche_race/tzero_porsche3.mov
Check out this new electric car:
http://www.acpropulsion.com
It actually beats a Porsche in race test:
http://www.acpropulsion.com/tzero_pages/Porsche_race/tzero_porsche3.mov
Will the people buy it? Someone on anothe rforum said that teh decision to buy an SUV is based o nexpendable income, and I agree. You make one of these things cheap and fashionable and you will have the solution. and personal flying things are too expensive for all but a few nuts.
I think, as with any new technology, that the price will always be high and out of reach for the average Joe. At first. Then as technologies are adopted, the “supply and demand” factor kicks in - effectively reducing the price.
As with the AC Propulsion car - I think this is a massive step in the right direction. Producing an all-electric vehicle that is small and lightweight that can hold its own against gas powered cars is no small feat.
As with the AC Propulsion car - I think this is a massive step in the right direction. Producing an all-electric vehicle that is small and lightweight that can hold its own against gas powered cars is no small feat.
- Status